Reviews - Intel Core i7-3770K (22nm Ivy Bridge)

[krazy_olie]

@Butuz: Check my post 23, first paragraph. The 'energy saving' models generally aren't worth it.

Looks like it doesn't mind being undervolted, it could make sense to buy the standard one and do that for similar gains. They do however have the same list price rather than being more expensive so the s version might be a nice compromise. Also we have a case here where because the heat is very concentrated a small increases in power result in big thermal differences, this means fans can run slower and as the relationship between speed and noise is non linear - much quieter .

[watercooled]

Again though, it shouldn't really matter unless you're constantly loading the CPU - the idle power (where the CPU will be most of the time in most home systems) will be almost identical, if not exactly identical. And unless you're overclocking, the thermal characteristics of IVB look fine.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It seems that Intel is using TIM now under the heatspreader:

http://www.overclockers.com/ivy-bridge-temperatures

Before they used solder and in the article they suggest this is the reason it runs hot.

[kalniel]

It seems that Intel is using TIM now under the heatspreader:

http://www.overclockers.com/ivy-bridge-temperatures

Before they used solder and in the article they suggest this is the reason it runs hot.

That doesn't make any kind of sense. Back to school*.



*rate limiting step in heat extraction is the metal/air interface of the reference cooler. As long as every previous step is faster than this rate it doesn't matter what their performance relative to each other is.

[shaithis]

Hmm, if that is the case then IVB may end up being a screaming overclocker as it makes it easy to remove the IHS and get really good temps.

We need answers!

[watercooled]

It seems that Intel is using TIM now under the heatspreader:

http://www.overclockers.com/ivy-bridge-temperatures

Before they used solder and in the article they suggest this is the reason it runs hot.

Hmm, I suspected as much (it was at least obvious the die-heatspreader interface was the weak link), and this also has the potential to degrade with age. I wonder why they made the switch?

[kalniel]

Hmm, I suspected as much (it was at least obvious the die-heatspreader interface was the weak link), and this also has the potential to degrade with age. I wonder why they made the switch?

OK, please explain to me how the die-heatspreader interface can be anything like as poor as the metal-air one on a default OEM cooler, even fan assisted?

Put another way, if thermal grease was the limiting factor, why do CPUs bother ramping up fan speed underload/when hot?

[watercooled]

Because heatsinks have a massive surface area to transfer heat to the surrounding air.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Like I said the article suggests the TIM but TBH in the scheme of things it does not really matter. Whatever said and done,Ivy Bridge does run hot above certain voltage and that is down to how Intel has designed the CPU and the packaging. It is a consideraton we need to take into consideration when compared to the competition,ie, the SB Core i5 and Core i7 CPUs.

[shaithis]

Thinking about it some more, I am expecting the first IHS-less results to be not a lot better then the results with the IHS.

The most hardcore overclockers have been trying to remove the solder and replace it with TIM for a while....and when they do manage it without destroying the chip, they do run cooler.

[watercooled]

Well even de-lidding you're still relying on TIM to transfer heat from the tiny die to the heatsink, so while it might improve things a bit with a lapped heatsink and good, carfully applied TIM, it's still not going to be as good as with a soldered heatspreader transferring heat much more efficiently to the larger surface area of the IHS (that's its purpose, besides the secondary one of protecting the fragile die). Like I said it's curious why Intel did this?

[Terbinator]

Well even de-lidding you're still relying on TIM to transfer heat from the tiny die to the heatsink, so while it might improve things a bit with a lapped heatsink and good, carfully applied TIM, it's still not going to be as good as with a soldered heatspreader transferring heat much more efficiently to the larger surface area of the IHS (that's its purpose, besides the secondary one of protecting the fragile die). Like I said it's curious why Intel did this?

Is it not because it saved (i imagine) on cost? Clearly IVB is cooler (when run in spec) at both idle and load so maybe TIM did suffice for their needs/aims.

[watercooled]

Yeah cost probably is the sole reason. I'm not impressed though, TIM dries up (∴becomes less effective at conducting heat) over time and it's not exactly simple to replace the stuff under the IHS.

[shaithis]

Well, until we know better, it's anyones guess. It could be that the density and tri-gate causes such hot-spotting on the chip that TIM was needed to make them run as cool as they do.

We really need someone to risk breaking their spanking new CPU on Monday.......although I am sure there will be a couple!

[Terbinator]

Well, until we know better, it's anyones guess. It could be that the density and tri-gate causes such hot-spotting on the chip that TIM was needed to make them run as cool as they do.

We really need someone to risk breaking their spanking new CPU on Monday.......although I am sure there will be a couple!

Those who are 'Loyal Members' can buy today with delivery tomorrow from Aria.

[watercooled]

Well, until we know better, it's anyones guess. It could be that the density and tri-gate causes such hot-spotting on the chip that TIM was needed to make them run as cool as they do.

But TIM is far less conductive and is far more likely to leave gaps than solder.

We really need someone to risk breaking their spanking new CPU on Monday.......although I am sure there will be a couple!

Oh I don't doubt there will be a few, even with a soldered IHS people attempt it: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=256092